Patna High Court
Jitendra Kumar Mehta @ Suraj @ Suraj Kumar @ Jitendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S., including the mandatory payment of monthly maintenance.
Summary
The petitioner, Jitendra Kumar Mehta, was arrested in a complaint alleging offences under Sections 85 and 115(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act. He applied for anticipatory bail, claiming he was falsely implicated by his estranged wife, the opposite party No.2, and offered to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs.2,000. The wife argued that mediation had failed and suspected the maintenance offer was a ploy to obtain bail, but also stated that non‑payment would justify cancellation of bail. The State opposed the bail application. The Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditioned it on the petitioner depositing the agreed maintenance, allowing the wife to seek cancellation if payments are missed, and noting that any court‑fixed maintenance would supersede the present arrangement.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act.
- Whether the Court can condition anticipatory bail on the payment of maintenance to the petitioner’s wife.
- Whether the bail can be cancelled if the petitioner fails to make the stipulated maintenance payments.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 115(2), 482(2), 85
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- maintenance
- marital dispute
- false implication
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- Section 85 B.N.S.
- Section 115(2) B.N.S.
- mediation
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73353 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2151 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Araria
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar Mehta @ Suraj @ Suraj Kumar @ Jitendra Kumar S/O
Jagdish Mehta R/O Village- Raghunathpur Dakshin, Ward No. 07, P.S-
Bhargama, Distt.- Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rupa Kumari W/O Jitendra Kumar Mehta @ Suraj @ Suraj Kumar @
Jitendra Kumar, D/O Bharatlal Mehta R/O Village- Shivnagar, Ward No. 12,
P.S- Raniganj, Distt.- Araria.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kishore Bharti
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad
Mr.Mukesh Kumar Rana
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 24-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the opposite party no. 2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 85 and
115(2) of the B.N.S.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner, being the husband, has been
falsely implicated in the instant case by the opposite party no. 2.
It is further submitted that relationship in between the petitioner
and the opposite party no. 2 has soured to an extent that where it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73353 of 2025(4) dt.24-03-2026
2/4
is not possible to revive the conjugal relationship for the present
but with passage of time and on intervention of well-wishers,
the parties may resolve the dispute amicably. It is next submitted
based on instruction that petitioner being the husband is aware
of his responsibility towards the opposite party no. 2 and the
child, as such, petitioner is willing to pay a monthly
maintenance of Rs.2,000/-.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
opposite party no. 2 submits that the case was referred for
mediation but then the mediation failed, as such, it might be a
ploy on the part of the petitioner to agree before this Court of
paying an amount of monthly maintenance of Rs.2,000/- only
for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, on which learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that
petitioner is aware of the consequences of giving undertaking
before this Court. It is further submitted that if petitioner
breaches the undertaking and if anticipatory bail is granted then
the same shall be liable to be cancelled, on which learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 submits
that since petitioner is willing to pay a monthly maintenance of
Rs.2,000/-, as such, no useful purpose would be served by
sending the petitioner to jail and chances of future reconciliation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73353 of 2025(4) dt.24-03-2026
3/4
may also get marred. It is next submitted that the bank account
number of the opposite party no. 2 shall be WhatsApped on the
WhatsApp number of the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner undertakes to communicate the same to the petitioner
so that monthly maintenance as agreed commences from
01.04.2026.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, let
the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or
surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released
on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case
is pending/Successor Court in connection with Complaint Case
No.2151C of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that opposite party no. 2
shall be at liberty to approach this Court seeking cancellation of
the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner, in the event, the
petitioner does not deposit the amount of maintenance as agreed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73353 of 2025(4) dt.24-03-2026
4/4
for two consecutive months.
8. It is further made clear that if the Court of
competent jurisdiction fixes the maintenance, in that event, the
present maintenance shall stop.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…